Steve Moxon is the Home Office whistle-blower who exposed illegal failures to apply immigration rules, and wrote The Great Immigration Scandal. His forthcoming book The Woman Racket is a fresh look at the disparate worlds of the sexes, based on new insights from evolutionary psychology showing that the supposedly privileged group (men) is in fact the most disadvantaged. His blog debates 'political correctness fascism' and counters journalists' misguided take on immigration and men-women issues.

Monday, July 08, 2013

Remarks about Bartoli's success in women's tennis are not ill made

John Inverdale's musings on Marion Bartoli's relative lack of 'looks' likely driving her success in winning the Wimbledon women's tennis championship actually are quite well made.

The basis of personal success in life is profoundly and invariably different according to sex. For men, the way to attract a partner to match your desires is to compete with other men for status, which is the way that males advertise their complement of 'good genes', which is what females are seeking in a male. For females, the name of the game is entirely different. With the fundamental basis of the biology of being female to be all about choosing male 'good genes' to then pass on to the next generation, then the criteria whereby a woman's attractiveness is judged is according not to 'good genes' but fertility (youth/beauty).

Either sex can of course choose to ape the other, but men wouldn't get very far if they choose to exchange intra-sexual competition and flaunt themselves as if they possess a womb! Women correspondingly don't become more sexually attractive if they exchange sitting on reception for climbing the workplace greasy pole to make company executive. However, if she does choose this route, then a woman can at least place herself in the paths of the sort of high-status males she's seeking. Unfortunately, the time it takes to achieve this means she will be older than the young model-like females for which the fellow executive are themselves on the look-out. So she will compound her less than optimal looks with her increasing age. A further problem is that the male high-flyers she encounters will tend not to form a relationship with one of their female colleagues, because of the perceived scope for extra-pair sex such females have with other executives. In consequence, she's left somewhat high and dry.

Nonetheless, plain-Jane types such as Marion Bartoli – if, that is, you agree with John Inverdale that she is indeed so plain, and instead is not devoid of an element of beauty – surely stand to make some gain from putting themselves in the limelight rather than to sulk in a garret! It's not a motivation to rival that of men's for climbing hierarchies of success, whether they be in commerce or sport; which is why the pinnacle of any area of achievement is predominantly a male habitat.

There is no use our current extreme-feminist-cobbled culture in denying what everyone full knows are key realities of life, because there is nothing even the most draconian 'thought-crime' legislation and other absurdities can ever do to change this even one iota.

Remarks such as John Inverdale's about Marion Bartoli are not insensitive but genuinely insightful, and any power they lack is through how obvious and ubiquitous they are.